cloudraker19 Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 So I'm trying to identify some bones I have. One of them very much seems to be a patella, but a little research online seems to suggest that all non-avian dinosaurs lacked a patella. Is this entirely true? I'm also curious, have organs or a brain ever been discovered. Fossilized remains I mean? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Triceratops Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 I think some researchers found what appeared to be a fossilised heart in a Thescalosaurus, but other experts disagreed saying the 'heart' was geologicaly formed. Please show us some pictures of your discoveries! -Lyall Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Troodon Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 I think its true all non-avian dinosaurs lack a patella. Skin is the most typical organ that is found of a dinosaur and that is rare. I'll second Triceratops comments on the Thescelosaurus, its named "Willo". There have been mummified dinosaurs found and I'm sure with all of the dinosaur finds in China organs may have been found but its truly a rare event. Hopefully others will chime in since finds don't always make news. Please post images your bones so we might be able to help you with an ID. Everyone here likes a challenge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cloudraker19 Posted January 17, 2015 Author Share Posted January 17, 2015 Here's some pics: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Troodon Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 These appear to be end views can you take some side views. What size is it and locality found? Thank you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
piranha Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 On 1/16/2015 at 9:17 PM, cloudraker19 said: ...I'm also curious, have organs or a brain ever been discovered. Fossilized remains I mean? Good question, I was also curious and discoverd this excellent info from: Weishampel, D.B., Dodson, P., & Osmólska, H. (2004) The Dinosauria. (2nd edition) University of California Press, 861 pp Chapter 28) Chinsamy, A., & Illenius, W.J.H. Physiology of Nonavian Dinosaurs Fossilized remains of soft tissues in two theropods, Sinosauropteryx (Chen et al. 1998) and Scipionyx (Dal Sasso and Signore 1998), suggest that the abdominal cavity of these theropods was subdivided in distinct cranial (pleuropericardial) and caudal (peritoneal) cavities (figs. 28.3, 28.4). In both cases, pigmented stains representing the remains of liver and intestinal tissues are restricted to the caudal region. In each case, the pigmentation extends from the vertebral column to the ventral thoracic wall (Ruben et al. 1997a, 1999). In Sinosauropteryx, comparatively few structural details of the abdominal viscera can be discerned, but in Scipionyx, exceptionally well-preserved structures include fine transverse folds of the intestinal wall. In Scipionyx, the liver is most readily visible under ultraviolet light, when it appears as a dark-indigo region distinct from other structures of the specimen or the surrounding matrix (fig. 28.3; Ruben et al. 1999). The color is significant, and strongly suggestive of preserved liver remains, because the fluorescence of biliverdin, a primary liver bile pigment in nonmammalian tetrapods, includes a primary emission peak in the blue region of the visible spectrum (~470 nm; Song et al. 1973). This indigo region extends vertically from the vertebral column to the ventral body wall (fig. 28.3; Ruben et al. 1999). Cranial to the liver, the pleuropericardial region is empty, because the delicate lung tissues were not fossilized, a preservational condition identical to that of exquisitely preserved Eocene mammals from Messel (fig. 28.3). That soft tissues were preserved at all suggests that bacterial decomposition had not progressed very far before burial. In particular, in Scipionyx, preserved structures include exceptional detail of the wall of the large intestine, in which fine rugose foldings can be readily discerned; the preservation of the horny claw sheaths on several of the digits; and muscular tissues in several areas of the body (Dal Sasso and Signore 1998). All these indicate quick postmortem burial, or at least removal from oxic conditions conducive to bacterial proliferation (Dal Sasso and Signore 1998). Generally, the liver is a comparatively solid organ, and it is not especially surprising that it could have survived a brief postmortem period prior to burial, whereas the more delicate lungs and small intestines did not. Furthermore, in extant crocodilians, the liver is attached by ligaments to the dorsal aspect of the body cavity, and largely rotates around this attachment during ventilation (Gans and Clark 1976); a similar attachment in theropods would have anchored the liver dorsally and prevented excessive dislocation of this organ prior to burial and preservation. Both Sinosauropteryx and Scipionyx materials appear to have collapsed gently and orthogonally, probably well after burial, during the general compaction of the sedimentary beds in which they were preserved. In Sinosauropteryx, the abdominal viscera are preserved as a carbonized film (Chen et al 1998; Currie and Chen 2001), which almost certainly would have settled on the substrate before sediment compaction took place. Likewise, in Scipionyx, the liver is identified primarily by the indigo stain that corresponds to preserved remnants of liver compounds. These, too, would have settled onto the underlying sediment early in the taphonomic process, before compaction of the sediment. Given that every indication suggests these individuals settled and were buried in a low-energy environment, with minimal, if any, skeletal displacement, there is no reason to suspect the internal organs were not faithfully preserved in situ. [The link to Dal Sasso & Signore 1998 has a diagram and photo of the intestines and liver of Scipionyx.] Dal Sasso, C., & Signore, M. (1998) Exceptional soft-tissue preservation in a theropod dinosaur from Italy. Nature 392: 383-387 OPEN ACCESS PDF 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
siteseer Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 Interesting question. Dinosaurs and it appears most Mesozoic birds didn't have a patella but most modern birds do have it so it must be that the group ancestral to modern birds developed it and it was retained in its descendants. Maybe it was beneficial to have another attachment surface for muscle or tendon for a better controlled landing on a branch or other precise spot - or helpful in leaping into the air? Mammals have it. It might have been important in early placental mammals in giving them some range of movement with the knee (for climbing) with some association to the way they walked (not up on their toes as in many advanced Cenozoic mammal groups but also using their palms, soles, and heels which is considered a primitive condition). I don't know. Just thinking online. So I'm trying to identify some bones I have. One of them very much seems to be a patella, but a little research online seems to suggest that all non-avian dinosaurs lacked a patella. Is this entirely true? I'm also curious, have organs or a brain ever been discovered. Fossilized remains I mean? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cloudraker19 Posted January 18, 2015 Author Share Posted January 18, 2015 I'm curious about the organs because I found something I originally thought was an egg, but upon closer inspection is kind of resembles a fossilized stomach with it's contents still enclosed. I'm going to take it in and see if I can get a professional paleontologist to look at it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpc Posted January 18, 2015 Share Posted January 18, 2015 I agree... more pix from different angles of your stranger bone. Is it actually form dinosaur bearing rock unit? The soft tissue and patella questions have been well answered.. I am in the camp the Wiillo'w heart is a concretion. Just sayin. There are enough concretions in the Lance and Hell Creek Fm's that I have not seen anything unusual about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cloudraker19 Posted January 18, 2015 Author Share Posted January 18, 2015 (edited) Here's some more shots. Yeah there are definitely dinosaur bones in the formation it came from, so it leads me more to think it must have been an pterasaur of some kind. Edited January 18, 2015 by cloudraker19 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Auspex Posted January 18, 2015 Share Posted January 18, 2015 Are you sure it's bone? "There has been an alarming increase in the number of things I know nothing about." - Ashleigh Ellwood Brilliant “Try to learn something about everything and everything about something.” - Thomas Henry Huxley >Paleontology is an evolving science. >May your wonders never cease! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cloudraker19 Posted January 18, 2015 Author Share Posted January 18, 2015 I'm pretty sure, I'm going to try and track down an opinion from a professional though and see what they make of it. Thanks everyone for the help so far!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Troodon Posted January 18, 2015 Share Posted January 18, 2015 Can you be more specific as to the locality where it was found. I'm not seeing bone from the images provided, did you find other bone fragments with this specimen.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpc Posted January 19, 2015 Share Posted January 19, 2015 It doesn't look much like a patella to me. I agree with troodon... I am not seeing much bone texture in it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts